THE SOCIAL CONTEXT OF CHANGES IN SLOVENE AGRICULTURE SINCE FEUDALISM

UDK: 631.1(497.4)(091) 338.43(497.4)(091) Pregledni rad Primljeno: 1. 7. 2005.

Jernej TURK, ^rtomir ROZMAN, Karmen PA@EK, Darja MAJKOVI^ Faculty of Agriculture, Maribor

This article offers an account of farming practices in Slovenia from the misty pre-modern period to the present. From the feudal order onwards to the end of the 20th century, Slovene farmers have always produced in another state or under a foreign regime. Because of the rather long chronological sweep, where four different economic and political systems have been in force (Austrian-Hungarian Empire, Yugoslav Autocratic Kingdom, Yugoslav Socialistic System and Slovenia as an independent state), the focus of this analysis is on the real potential effects of these fundamentally different systems on the farming structure, performance of agriculture and peasant traditions in the country. The objective of this manuscript is to address previously unanswered questions about how these distinctively different ruling entities may have affected Slovene private farmers and agriculture in general. Albeit Slovenia has not become a successor state to the Austrian Empire, its exposure to agricultural reforms, laws, and practices in the Austrian Empire (from the late eighteenth century to 1918) left their mark on Slovene agricultural practices. This explains why farming practices somewhat differed from those in the rest of Yugoslavia during the entire twentieth century. It also helps us to understand better the genuine attitude of Slovene private farmers towards the ongoing reform of the Common Agricultural Policy and their relative willingness in adopting its prevailing trends. Key words: agricultural history, Slovenia, foreign ruling entities, peasant tradition, farming practices

199

Jernej Turk, University of Maribor, Faculty of Agriculture, Vrbanska 30, 2000 Maribor, Slovenia. E-mail: jernej.turk@uni-mb.si

INTRODUCTION

200

The history of Slovene agriculture was strongly influenced by several nations, cultures and even religions (Romans, Germans, Austrians, French, Hungarians, Italians, Turks and the Southern Slavs). Especially rapid changes began at the end of the 19th century when Slovenia was a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. That particular period was characterised by the introduction of modern tools/farming implements, new species of cultivated plants, genetic improvements in animal breeding, new organisation of peasant markets, development of infrastructure (new roads and railways), building up of a communication network in rural areas (in particular, agricultural newspapers and books), education of young farmers and expansion of industrial sector and its related services. Although Slovenia has not become a successor state to the Austrian Empire, its economic, cultural, and legal structures have had a lasting influence on agriculture. This modernisation process of Slovene agriculture was interrupted by the 1st and the 2nd World Wars. After the 1st World War Slovenia joined the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, while after the 2nd World War Slovenia became a part of the same country – then renamed as Yugoslavia. During that time the government introduced drastic changes based primarily on communist ideology. The implementation of administrative measures throughout the economy was aimed at promoting the overall socialisation of the agricultural sector as discussed and portrayed by several authors (Arnez, 1958; Ho~evar, 1965; Hoffman and Neal, 1962; Zanivovich, 1968). The maximum size of the private farm was confined to 10 hectares of agricultural land. The expansion of the state (public) farm sector was alleviated at the expense of private farmers. The application of basic principles of self-management in the middle of the 1950s was especially characteristic through the formation of agricultural working co-operatives which unfolded a range of different activities. A tendency where the public farm sector (e.g., state-run farms and coops) tailored the path and pace of agricultural development was never really put in doubt, despite the major importance of the private farm sector in terms of total agricultural production and proportion of its total farm deliveries and earnings. The goal of this article is to understand why the effects of Austrian Habsburg Monarchy on current Slovene farm structure and behavioural patterns of domestic peasants are more evident and profound than those dating from two different Yugoslav states in the twentieth century. The context of the current findings can be located in two related but distinct ruling entities; Austrian Monarchy and Yugoslav regimes. What

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

THE IMPACT OF AUSTRIAN AND GERMAN RULE ON SLOVENE AGRICULTURE

is known of their interdependence is highly inferential, and statistics that would allow comparison are scarce, but the available evidence suggests that both distinct periods could have influenced small peasant households in a similar way (i. e., declines in farms size, inefficient farming, peasants increasingly getting more aloof to external events – risk aversion, etc.). This article addresses previously unanswered questions about how these distinctively different ruling entities may have affected Slovene peasant households and farming in general.

201

In the historical literature about the first periods of settlement in what is today Slovenia, it is almost impossible to extract a reliable piece of statistical information, and the historical records through time are virtually non-existent. The first appearance of villages and associated primitive forms of farming took place between the ninth and twelfth centuries, when the main period of settlement in Slovenia was recorded. The Slavic ruling group in early Slovene society was gradually replaced by invading German nobility. German landlords and the influential Catholic Church became the main representatives of the feudal order in Slovene agriculture. Peasants were not a homogeneous group and constituted three major strata in Slovene villages during that time. The first stratum can be attributed to the manorial serfs who lived in bondage in or near the castle. The second group of serfs were given separate homesteads with required payment of taxes and compulsory field-work (e.g., corvee) assigned by German noblemen. The third form of Slovene peasants were half-free countrymen who were obliged to pay taxes to their squires but were released from doing corvee. During a period between the twelfth and fifteenth centuries the vast majority of the Slovene rural population owned their own modest homesteads but were still required to pay various forms of taxes and frequently forced to do appalling corvee. Therefore, it is not too startling to observe that this period was characterised by severe disruptions occurring in the Slovene countryside, caused by incessant peasants' uprisings. A meaningful response to peasants' rebellions was the new policy of agrarian reform introduced by the empress Maria Theresa during the period between 1740 and 1780, which remained in force also under her son Joseph II – until 1790. The main result coming from this agrarian reform was that the feudal lord's control over the peasant was limited through a series of decrees that drastically reduced the corvee and lowered the taxes. Contemplated as a whole, this period designates a change in the atti-

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

202

tude towards Slovene peasants, which finally resulted in the abolishment of serf obligations in 1848. There is no reliable evidence which traces the earliest forms of Slovene agricultural communities. Slovenia is the only South Slavic region where, for centuries, an establishment of family farms has been preferable to various types of co-operatives. The most significant form of Slovene homestead has probably been a joint family farm which has symbolised the enlarged agricultural household. The idea of co-operation has simply corresponded to the farmer's family affiliated with close relatives. A strong Austrian and German influence is likely to be blamed that Slovene farmers have never really been willing to join various forms of agricultural communities. The principle of undivided peasant farms has been set through the law of inheritance based on the rule of primogeniture. A common distrust of Slovene farmers, related to any type of community formed by the outsiders, lasted until the nineteenth century, when the successful system of agricultural credit institutions was promoted. The nineteenth century clearly marked a new epoch in the life of Slovene villages. Compulsory corvee and feudal dues were abolished and farmers were free to find other sources of income or even change their occupation. When the global depression occurred in 1873, many Slovene peasants emigrated to Western Europe and the United States of America. The majority of poor peasants did not see any other solution but to emigrate. Around 2/3 of the Slovene population was somehow involved in farming at the beginning of the twentieth century. Since farmers were faced with insurmountable economic problems, some tried to find employment in industry which, however, could not satisfy an increased demand for jobs, while others found a solution in emigration. A process of emigration reached its peak during the period between 1890 and 1910. In the year 1907 only, the number of Slovene emigrants to the United States of America exceeded 20,000 (around 1.5% of the total population of that time), with a substantial proportion of peasants among them. This huge demographic deficit meant an exceptional loss of human potential in rural areas (Tomasevich, 1955). Until the end of the nineteenth century, the political and economic life in Slovenia was primarily affected by the German rule. A strong influence on the part of foreigners has also brought higher levels of technological and even cultural standards of living in Slovenia as compared to the rest of the Southern Slavic nations. The organisation that played a particularly important role in the economic and political life during the last decades of Austrian rule was the Agricultural

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

THE EFFECTS OF YUGOSLAV STATES ON SLOVENE FARMING PRACTICES

Credit Bank which offered farmers favourable loans at low interest rates. The activities of this institution were supported by the Catholic Church and ceased with the 1st World War. The relative success of this specific type of co-operative can be attributed to the fact that agricultural property has never been so excessively subdivided as in other parts of former Yugoslavia. The period between 1848 and 1918 is also characterised by an expropriation of former feudal landowners. Two basic groups of domestic farmers were distinguishable at that time. A small number of richer farmers whose status differed markedly from the vast majority of poor peasants who were forced to seek an additional source of income outside agriculture. Although this period appeared to be beneficial for the farmers in different ways, some measures imposed by the Austrian Habsburg Monarchy led towards land fragmentation and have actually given rise to smaller-sized private farms. The Austrian Habsburg Monarchy has always stood firmly behind the Catholic Church and strongly advocated family values which Slovene peasants have ubiquitously respected and followed up to the present. It was mainly religion that left the most significant impact on the vast majority of Slovene peasant families, which had largely affected their emotional attachment to land, and to some extent also reshaped their way of thinking (i.e. conservative mentality). In addition to that, the attachment of peasants to their land could also be attributed to a considerable lack in their territorial and social mobility exerted, which in turn has again given rise to a certain degree of behavioural conservatism. Peasants were always regarded as the strongest fortress of Slovene nationalism.

203

The strong Austrian influence was curtailed after the 1st World War. Having established a new state in 1918 (The Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes), the Slovene authorities attempted to gain more autonomy than previously. The idea of Slovene nationalism which had been denied for so many centuries, finally found its place in a newly formed country. This process was manifested most apparently in agriculture where farmers actually represented the strongest bastion of Slovene patriotism. Even though the central authorities in Belgrade tried to subdue private farming, this did not affect significantly Slovene private farmers. The persistent intention to nationalise agricultural properties gained some results but due to specific circumstances in Slovene society (i.e., solid link between private farmers and Catholic Church), the expropriation of agricultural assets was only partially accomplished.

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

204

Moreover, unlike the rest of the Yugoslav regions, Slovenia maintained its agricultural credit system which was adopted by the farmers already under Austrian rule, but failed to prevent the increase in indebtedness on the part of many farmers. With the financial crisis of 1932 came a moratorium on peasants' debts. In spite of the better-developed agricultural credit system, 48.3 per cent of all agricultural debts in Slovenia in 1932 were owed to private moneylenders and storekeepers; 45.9 per cent of all rural households were in debt, and this affected 59.9 per cent of all cultivated land (Winner, 1971). After the 1st World War, the land which belonged to the Habsburgs and their retainers was expropriated without any compensation. The amendments to agrarian reform introduced by the Yugoslav monarch Kara|or|evi} in 1919, were just provisional and required a long process of legislation before their implementation. Almost all larger forest areas were declared state property and peasants owned rights to exploit timber for domestic use only. Two censuses which took place in 1914 and 1931, respectively, show a substantial subdivision of farm land. During the first three decades of the twentieth century the share of small peasants, who on average owned less than 5 hectares of farm land, amounted to around 50% of all Slovene agricultural producers. Central authorities finally realised that possible separation of the private farmers from the ownership of land had to be prevented, and some measures were accordingly implemented; a) prohibition against the disposition or encumbrance of land obtained by the agrarian reform until specifically permitted by law; b) moratorium for peasant debts incurred before April 19, 1932, and their later reduction and consolidation; c) legislation on the protected minimum homestead (Warriner, 1959). The first measure was taken in order to prevent any selling, mortgaging or transferring of agricultural land until this is allowed by promulgated legislation. The second measure was introduced to protect farmers from private creditors and all other financial sorts of exploitation. The final measure was necessary to protect agricultural households against sudden foreclosures which might be based either on debts to individuals or on taxes demanded by the government. Agricultural policy implemented by the authorities in Belgrade to overcome the crisis in agriculture was not well designed and did not contribute to favourable economic returns from farming. However, considering the global economic and political turmoil all over Europe before the 2nd World War, it is really difficult not to admit at least the honest intentions of pre-war governments to preserve private farming. In contrast, the post-war misgoverned policy without any pretence paved

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

205

the way to the socialisation of the Slovene agricultural sector by discriminating against and oppressing private farmers, which eventually caused adverse effects for a vast majority of domestic agricultural producers. Slovene farmers experienced life full of hardship during the entire inter-war period for various reasons. The persistent attachment of farmers to land had not been exclusively an economic virtue but had also a distinctive emotional connotation. This was the reason why so many peasants after devastation caused by the 2nd World War still had a strong will to maintain farming. They had always been a subject of discriminatory policy which reached its peak during the process of overall socialisation where the controversial and purely politically motivated objective to undermine the status of private farmers was at its highest. Despite an unfavourable economic climate and contemptuous attitude on the part of the government towards them, private farmers survived and even acquired a special ability to compete with the heavily protected "socialised" (public) farm sector. The immediate post-war period in Yugoslav economy was characterised by a strong Soviet influence. Yugoslav authorities at that time were eager to copy in detail the Soviet planned economy with all the typical administrative-command mechanisms built within it. In the early 1950s, Yugoslavia abandoned the Soviet model of central planning solely due to political reasons. The Soviet type of planned economy was gradually replaced with the so-called "Yugoslav market socialism" which, to a certain extent, enabled a higher degree of economic liberalisation. The early post-war development of Yugoslav agriculture can be divided into two phases. The first period is a result of the promulgation of the Law on Agrarian Reform and Colonization in 1945. The other phase in the development of Yugoslav socialist agriculture reflects the introduction of the National Agricultural Property Law enacted in 1953. It reduced the maximum size of a private farm set by the Law of 1945 (between 25 and 35 hectares) to 10 hectares of agricultural land. By this legislation, an institutional codex for various forms of agricultural co-operatives was also set and approved. The situation in the Yugoslav agricultural market before the 2nd World War was affected by the global agrarian crisis. Agricultural prices were low and their parity with the prices of industrial goods was unfavourable. Immediately after the war, the federal Yugoslav government set and kept prices of farm goods at a level which did not correspond to costs of production. It was not until 1956 that agricultural prices reached their pre-war level. During the entire period of overall social-

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

206

isation of the Slovene agricultural sector (1945-1991), more than 80% of the total farm output was affected by official price controls and only 15-20% of agricultural prices were determined in the market. The strict control of farm prices occurred at the producer, wholesale and retail levels. Indicative prices for several agricultural products such as maize and slaughter animals (cattle, sheep, pigs and poultry) were fixed regularly at the federal (Yugoslav) level. In practice, such pricing policy mechanisms were implemented to maintain economies of size in the socialist farm sector. Prices of certain goods were administered by means of various contracts through a governmental system of fixed advanced payments which, in fact, represented a primitive form of guaranteed prices. Even bigger discrepancies occurred in the case of some staple farm inputs, where the prices of fertilisers, chemicals and agricultural machinery differed depending upon the origin of buyers. The tax which was levied upon private farmers on the purchase of agricultural implements was considered to be the most discriminatory measure introduced by the socialist government. This policy of favouring the socialist type of agricultural production resulted in the withdrawal of private farmers from the "real market" into the so-called "peasant market" where mainly dairy products, eggs, fruits and vegetables were sold at competitive – market determined prices. The institution of peasant market within a socialist type of production is, thus, thought to represent a rather primitive but still genuine form of market arrangements as perceived in Western economies (Boyd, 1991). Dominant socialist relations in the Slovene agricultural sector did not respond to market signals. The policy to neglect and discriminate against private farmers was a common feature of introduced agricultural programmes after the 2nd World War. This upheaval in Yugoslav (Slovene) agricultural policy was made to inaugurate and preserve the socialist production in a rural economy. Although self-management was introduced already back in 1950, the transition from the centralised-planned economy to self-management itself took place in 1953 (instigated partly also by Stalin's death) when a new constitution was enacted. The principal aim of the newly restored economic system was to transform state property into socially-owned property. This might seem quite a radical change for an outsider but what it actually meant was free space and choice given for the expansion of already huge public farms and the development of agricultural working co-operatives. The application of basic principles of self-management in agriculture was particularly characteristic through the formation of agricultural co-operatives. They did not have any sim-

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

207

ilarities in the organisation of the farms with the co-ops in the Soviet Union and their satellites. This was genuinely a Yugoslav type of firm organisation, with self-management structure, a broad regional independence (individual republics), and sound connections with the political elite. The main idea was to replace the usual form of state ownership with the "social" type of ownership. The peculiarity of this situation coincided with the permanent efforts to restore the socialised farm sector in accordance with the prevailing political postulates and proclamations. The institution of agricultural working co-operative was set up just to yield a socialist reconstruction and reorganisation within agriculture. Co-operatives unfolded a whole variety of services, including financial and crediting activities. A crucial stage in the rapid expansion of agricultural working co-operatives in Slovenia was recorded after 1954, when the major principles of self-management were widely adopted in practice. During the period between 1954 and 1958, the affirmation of agricultural co-operatives related to an establishment of co-operative councils. The enforcement of co-operative councils caused a situation where each institutional body represented the instrument of self-management policies with (negative) implications for the private farmers. The idea of society as a legitimate owner of all means of production implied that the main protagonists and investors in agricultural working co-operatives (private farmers) were actually excluded from any important decision-making. The conditions were thus created for virtually total control over private entrepreneurs in farming, and for the strengthening of the public sector as the principal player carrying out the socialist transformation of agriculture. The process of a gradual reduction of cultivable land owned by the private farmers and a tendency to expand the production potential of the socialist sector, by setting up huge state-run farms and agricultural co-operatives, were two typical features of agricultural programs promoted during the period of overall socialisation of the Slovene agricultural sector. It does not come as a surprise, therefore, if farmers, in order to supply their livelihood, were forced to seek employment outside the farm. The most characteristic type of Slovene private farm of that time was "the multi-income source family farm" which emerged from such a discriminatory agricultural policy led by the socialist government. Two types of multi-income source family farms actually arose. Private farms which made an effort to gain income mainly from agricultural occupations and agricultural holdings whose major source of income was derived from non-agricultural activities. Because of an indiscreet enforcement of agricultural socialisa-

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

208

tion many private farmers sought employment in industry or industry-related services. This process has given rise to a situation where most multi-income source family farms have been gradually converted into garden plots considering their size and the levels of economic efficiency achieved. Slovene agriculture has always followed a mixed type of production. A typical mountainous landscape does not allow farmers in most regions to produce enough grains but enables them to rear animals, ruminants in particular. At the beginning of the 1960s, when the process of forced industrialisation was well under way, Slovene land was virtually half forested and around 30% of the total area composed of pasture land and meadows, while the fields and gardens accounted for less than 15% of farm land. It is hence understandable why forest exploitation has been essential for the economy of farmers in many regions and why one of the basic features of peasant economy has always been the exploitation of forest resources. Moreover, the importance of woodlands has been unambiguous even in the very early time of settlement (second half of the 6th century and first several decades of the 7th century) when settlers moved to areas close to forests and water sources (SAZU, 1970). It is not startling, therefore, to observe that forest farming was put on an economic basis over a century ago and in many Slovene areas the sales of timber, and employment in the timber industry, represented the chief source of income for the farmers. Slovenia became independent in year 1991 following the violent break-up of Yugoslavia. A direct impact of independence was reflected in the loss of Yugoslav market, which has contributed to sluggish economic growth in the early 1990s. However, due to relatively high levels of economic development attained prior to its independence, no such radical economic policy reform was needed as was the case with other Central and Eastern European countries. As early as in 1992, Slovenia was admitted to the United Nations; since 1994 Slovenia is also one of the signatory members of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), and one of the founder members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Slovenia signed the Association Agreement with the EU on 10th June 1996, which was afterwards upgraded in a formal application for EU membership in March 1998 (Erjavec et al., 2003). Slovenia became an EU member in May 2004. The importance of agricultural production in the modern Slovene economy is relatively negligible (currently around 2% of GDP and less than 6% of total employment). Nevertheless, the macroeconomic indicators do not illustrate the whole impact of agriculture on the rural development and social stability of a significant part of Slovene society. Farm

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

209

production has, namely, during this time, represented an important buffer of the emerging social tensions. This was one of the main reasons why the small agricultural plots remained in production and why the profound subsistence nature of farming in Slovenia has still not faded away. The total Slovene surface is around 20,000 square kilometers, of which more than half is covered by woodlands, and nearly 40 per cent is used for agriculture – with a predominant share of permanent pastures (above 60%), whereas 30% of agricultural areas pertain to arable land. In contrast to other ex-socialist European countries (with a sole exception of Poland), there was always a predominant share of privately-owned farm land. This was the result of an agricultural policy that allowed the existence of small family farms, where collectivisation efforts were not that strong. Just before the independence (year 1991), there was more than 90% of all land in the hands of private farmers and merely 8% of land was occupied by big state-owned farms, now referred to as agricultural enterprises which operate as share-holding companies. Slovene private farms have always been small-scaled with their land hugely scattered. During the period between 1945 and 1991, the average private farm size just exceeded 3 hectares of agricultural land. This average farm size has risen during the last decade from 3.2 hectares to 4.8 hectares of agricultural land, while the share of private ownership of land has slightly increased from 92% to 96%. Diseconomies of size is still a typical feature of most Slovene private agricultural holdings which most likely cannot survive in a competitive European market environment. Clearly, the prospects of viable agricultural development in Slovene relations, if based on economic reasoning exclusively, have become rather bleak. Fortunately, many of the most competitive farmers have managed to enhance their land and, consequently, volume of production through land purchases and leases. Completely new market challenges and economic necessity have already been contributing to a certain upheaval in the minds of "modern Slovene farmers" to go along with market-driven agricultural production. Likewise, the declared policy objectives on a national level also emulate the European Union (EU) policy reform in agriculture (Common Agricultural Policy – CAP). This would entail a steady production of cheap and quality food, an increased competitive ability of domestic farmers and related higher economic efficiency levels, thorough structural policy reform, etc. In recent years, the preservation of natural, human and cultural resources have also been put high on the agricultural policy reform agenda – multifunctional role of agriculture.

CONCLUSIONS

210

Austrian and German rule brought for Slovene farmers at least a sense that for the first time in history they really had in possession their own land. Private property became an increasingly important issue and the strong emotional attachment of farmers to their land has never really faded away. A strong influence of the Catholic Church in rural areas just added to that perception. In contrast, forced industrialisation of various Yugoslav governing authorities caused great mistrust on the part of Slovene private farmers who were always reluctant to accept the path and pace of agrarian reforms set either by autocratic (Yugoslav Kingdom) or socialist systems (Yugoslavia after 1945). Experiences from the past show that both Austrian Habsburg and Yugoslav rule had some positive and some very adverse effects on Slovene peasant families (i.e., very small farms, inefficient production, etc.). The positive impact can mainly be seen in a bulk of different farming practices that farmers had adopted during the last two centuries. The Austrian monarchy and influential Catholic Church had especially contributed to the situation where peasant families were very emotionally attached to their land (often without any economic reckoning), and also partially reshaped the peasants' behavioural patterns (being more self-introverted, independent or even stubborn). This could be one of the most important reasons why collectivisation effects during the entire socialist era had never really had any significant effects on the majority of Slovene private farmers. Some of these effects from the past are, however, still clearly present and may have a profound impact in the future – as long as farming will be the occupation and way of life of people living in the Slovene countryside. From the feudal order onwards to the end of the 20th century, Slovene farmers have always produced in another state or under a foreign regime. In fact, the year 1991 marks the period when domestic agricultural producers for the first time in Slovene history found themselves farming in an independent state; it does not come as a surprise, therefore, if they are asking now whether it was really necessary to join a new "amalgamated state" – despite its stated policies of favourable agrarian reforms? Does EU membership actually tend to improve or deteriorate their position? Agricultural policy makers and politicians, in particular, argue that most Slovene farmers and their families are definitely to benefit from EU membership, but their dilemmas and concern remain unabated.

REFERENCES

Boyd, M. L. (1991), Organization, Performance, and System Choice. East European Agricultural Development, Boulder, Westview Press.

Arnez, J. (1958), Slovenia in European Affairs: Reflections on Slovenian Political History, New York, Studia Slovenica. Erjavec, E., Rednak, M., Volk, T., Turk, J. (2003), The Transition from Socialist Agriculture to the Common Agricultural Policy: the Case of Slovenia, Post-Communist Economies, 15 (4): 557-569. Ho~evar, T. (1965.), The Structure of the Slovenian Economy, 1848-1963, New York, Studia Slovenica. Hoffman, G. W., Neal, F. W. (1962.), Yugoslavia and the New Communism, New York, Twentieth Century Fund.

Slovenska akademija znanosti in umetnosti – SAZU (1970), Gospodarska in dru`bena zgodovina Slovencev: zgodovina agrarnih panog, I. zvezek: Agrarno gospodarstvo, Ljubljana, Dr`avna zalo`ba Slovenije. Tomasevich, J. (1955), Peasants, Politics, and Economic Change in Yugoslavia, Stanford, Stanford University Press. Warriner, D. (1959), Urban Thinkers and Peasant Policy in Yugoslavia, 1918-59, Slavonic and East European Review, 38: 59-81. Zanivovich, G. M. (1968), The Development of Socialist Yugoslavia, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press.

Winner, I. (1971), A Slovenian Village. @erovnica. Providence, Brown University Press.

Društveni kontekst promjena u slovenskoj poljoprivredi: od feudalizma do danas

211

Poseban dio ovoga rada posve}en je razli~itim poljoprivrednim sustavima u Sloveniji od prijemodernoga vremena do danas. Od feudalizma pa sve do kraja 20. stolje}a slovenski poljoprivrednici uvijek su proizvodili u nekom stranom re`imu ili dr`avi. Zbog relativno dugoga perioda, u kojem su ~etiri dru{tveno-ekonomska sustava bila na snazi (Habsbur{ka Monarhija, Kraljevina Jugoslavija/SHS, FNRJ i SFR Jugoslavija te sada{nja nezavisna Slovenija), posebna va`nost na ovom mjestu daje se analizi efekata tih posve razli~itih sustava na strukturu i narav slovenske poljoprivrede te samom polo`aju seljaka u njoj. Glavni je cilj ovoga rada odgovoriti na pitanje kako su ti sasvim razli~iti dru{tveno-politi~ki sustavi utjecali na doma}u poljoprivredu, {to se do sada u literaturi s toga podru~ja jo{ nije posebno istra`ivalo. Pri tome je prepoznat velik utjecaj Habsbur{ke Monarhije na glavne trendove djelovanja i reforme u slovenskoj poljoprivredi tijekom 20. stolje}a, koji su malo druk~iji u odnosu

Jernej TURK, ^rtomir ROZMAN, Karmen PA@EK, Darja MAJKOVI^ Agronomski fakultet, Maribor

TURK, J. ET AL.: THE SOCIAL CONTEXT...

DRU[. ISTRA@. ZAGREB GOD. 16 (2007), BR. 1-2 (87-88), STR. 199-212

na sve ostale dr`ave na podru~ju biv{e Jugoslavije. Ovdje treba tra`iti i razloge za{to je suvremeni slovenski privatni poljoprivrednik spreman slijediti reforme skupne agrarne politike EU-a (Common Agricultural Policy) te na njih po potrebi i pravodobno, odnosno primjereno, reagirati. Klju~ne rije~i: povijest poljoprivrede, Slovenija, strani re`imi, tradicija selja{tva, poljoprivredne prakse

Diese Arbeit widmet sich in einem besonderen Teil den unterschiedlichen landwirtschaftlichen Systemen, die Slowenien in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung von vormodernen Zeiten bis heute aufzuweisen hat. Seit der feudalistischen Gesellschaftsordnung bis zum Ende des 20. Jahrhunderts befanden sich die slowenischen Bauern stets unter fremder Herrschaft oder in einem fremden Staat, mit dem sie sich nicht identifizieren konnten. Die hier untersuchte chronologische Periode umfasst viele Jahrhunderte und vier verschiedene gesellschaftlichwirtschaftliche Systeme: die Habsburgermonarchie, das Königreich Jugoslawien (Königreich der Serben, Kroaten und Slowenen), das sozialistische Jugoslawien und das unabhängige, moderne Slowenien. Daher steht hier die Analyse der jeweiligen Auswirkungen im Vordergrund, mit denen sich die unterschiedlichen Gesellschaftsordnungen innerhalb von Struktur und Charakter der slowenischen Landwirtschaft sowie in der Stellung der Bauern selbst bemerkbar machten. Diese Untersuchung möchte in erster Linie die Frage beantworten, welchen Einfluss die unterschiedlichen Gesellschaftsordnungen auf die Landwirtschaft hatten, was in der Fachliteratur dieses Bereichs bislang nicht eingehender behandelt worden ist. Die Verfasser erkannten, dass der starke Einfluss der habsburgischen Monarchie auf die wichtigsten Trends und Reformen der slowenischen Landwirtschaft das ganze 20. Jahrhundert hindurch spürbar war und für gewisse Unterschiede zur Landwirtschaft in den übrigen ehemaligen jugoslawischen Teilrepubliken sorgte. Hierin sind auch die Gründe zu suchen, warum die slowenischen Landwirte reformbereit sind und sich der "Common Agricultural Policy" der EU anschließen wollen. Schlüsselwörter: Landwirtschaftsgeschichte, Slowenien, Fremdherrschaft, Bauerntradition, landwirtschaftliche Praktiken

Jernej TURK, ^rtomir ROZMAN, Karmen PA@EK, Darja MAJKOVI^ Landwirtschaftliche Fakultät, Maribor

Die Wandel der slowenischen Landwirtschaft im gesellschaftlichen Kontext. Vom Feudalismus bis heute

212

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful